In Worcester’s case, the suburbs in the region accounted for all the growth, while the city itself actually saw a 2% decline. Clearly there is more work to be done to spread prosperity to our older urban communities. But urban success stories come nearby for us to learn from. If looking just at the primary cities in their regions (excluding suburbs), Providence was the highest scorer in New England over the eight years at fifth nationally. Boston-Cambridge was 12th.
What is interesting about Greater Boston is that while the city itself got slightly more affluent over the period, the suburbs actually saw a decline in median household income. This is consistent with national trends which have seen poverty rise fastest in suburban areas, particularly many older suburban communities. The story of suburbs in Massachusetts therefore paints an interesting picture, with Worcester’s 495 belt becoming quite wealthy while older suburbs to the north and south of Boston were losing ground.
Back to the national scene and we can feel pretty good about how well we have performed economically in a tough decade. The depressing reality however shows that the American economy stopped lifting working families. That was already the case well before the recession or Obama took office. To come back to Brookings, their report states that:
The middle class shrank over the course of the decade as income for the typical U.S. household declined. In 2008, U.S. median household income was $52,029-a real decline of $2,241 since 1999. Over the same period, the share of households earning “middle class” incomes fell by 1.8 percentage points. In 2008, racial income disparities persisted, with the typical black household lagging U.S. median income and the typical Asian household exceeding it by nearly the same margin ($17,000 and $18,000, respectively)
Restoring middle class prosperity in America has to be the great cause of the next few years. In Massachusetts and New England we seem to have a headstart, and the evidence suggesting we have come out of the recession faster and stronger than the nation, confirms the point. Here’s to hoping we can keep politicians who get it – like our Governor and Democrats in Congress – in office this year so they can fully implement a jobs/growth program for the next decade.
P.S. The Brookings Report is loaded with good stuff so follow the link – read some of it and play with the great mapping tools.
I really like all of you people very much. This is an excellent post with important information about the state of our state and country. It pretty much pinpoints the reason why our economy is so slow to recover, and that is the continued decline of the working/middle class.
<
p>I’m afraid though, that I’m not going to fall in line like the good Democrat, and proclaim that Governor Patrick “gets it.” He does not get it. To apply a fee to middle class car insurance premiums only to turn aroung and give a 22.5 million dollar tax credit to Liberty Mutual is not a convincing sign of “getting it.” I’ve never been a sweet talker. I don’t think I’ll change now. The Liberty Mutual/fee on car insurance premiums philosophy was my last straw with Governor Patrick. It gave huge insight into his lack of understanding of the crisis facing our state and the country.
at the Governor’s record on economic development. I think its pretty strong.
<
p>Major new investments in infrastructure under his capital plans well before the economy slid into the ditch. Further investment to put Mass at the forefront in green tech and life sciences. Plans for rail to the south coast, and targeted support for development projects across the state. I think he has deployed the Recovery Act funds well also to support jobs.
<
p>He’s taken an activist approach to economic development. Its always going to be risky when Government seeks to pick winners – just as private investors, Govt will get it wrong on occasion. And I don’t doubt there are legitimate questions around the merits of individual projects or whether in some cases state funding is substituting for what the private sector would do anyway – meaning the investment is dead weight. But with the economy so fragile and Mass trying to stay ahead of the curve vis-a-vis competitors I’d rather an activist approach than the alternative. More than any governor in the past two decades, Patrick has sought to use the resources of the state to grow the economy. He does get it.
<
p>If there was something I think he could do to support his approach – it would be to set out for discussion a framework for Mass economic development over the long-term. This would enable the public to get a sense for what the strategy is and therefore why certain decisions were taken. That may place Lib Mutual and other decisions in context.
<
p>As for the insurance premiums you mention I don’t know much about that. Patrick, like all chief execs in the recession, has been dealt a pretty tough hand maintaining fiscal balance. Raising revenues in creative ways, alongside the significant cuts he has had to make, has been unavoidable. He did bring competition to the auto insurance market which should be beneficial to folks.
Patrick has done pretty well on economic management, and quit reasonably trumpets it. On balance, his record and history in the private sector has served him well.
<
p>It’s in the non-private aspects of his job that Deval hasn’t distinguished himself; but given that his two most prominent opponents are downright hostile toward government in daily life, he gets a free pass this November.